Search results

Staff facing organizational change often experience negative emotions when they anticipate or encounter injustice and these can lead to turnover, absenteeism, decreased productivity and resistance to change. The aims of this study were to identify the nature of the emotions reported by respondents and explore how they were triggered by perceptions of different forms of injustice: distributive, procedural, interpersonal and informational. A series of interviews with those playing different roles in change initiatives, at various hierarchical levels and in a range of organizations, demonstrates the corrosive effects of perceived injustice and the attendant negative emotions such as anger, frustration, anxiety and guilt. These emotions tended to be more intense for those experiencing change and somewhat subdued for those leading and managing it. The findings contribute to research into organizational change by presenting insights into the affective elements of four types of injustice that have seldom been explored in previous qualitative studies.

This study examines how perceptions of injustice, anger, and group identification motivate follower intentions to engage in collective action against leaders. The study revolved around the Malaysian prime minister’s actions and responses toward allegations of misuse of public funds. Responses from 112 Malaysians via a cross-sectional survey revealed that follower perceptions of leader injustice are significantly related to anger toward the leader, which in turn is related to intentions to engage in collective action. The relationship between perceptions of distributive injustice and anger is moderated by group identification, while group efficacy moderates the relationship between anger and collective action intentions.

In this chapter, we summarize and build on the current state of the customer mistreatment literature in an effort to further future research on this topic. First, we detail the four primary conceptualizations of customer mistreatment. Second, we present a multilevel model of customer mistreatment, which distinguishes between the unfolding processes at the individual employee level and the service encounter level. In particular, we consider the antecedents and outcomes unique to each level of analysis as well as mediators and moderators. Finally, we discuss important methodological concerns and recommendations for future research.

This chapter historicizes the social construction of racism in Brazilian society and its relation to the development of the library and information science (LIS) field. It is a theoretical-reflective research built on the scientific literature of the field of LIS and related areas that aims at reflecting on social justice in Brazilian libraries and creating strategies to confront institutional racism. The authors develop five main points to understand Brazilian racism: the myth of racial democracy, structural and institutionalized racism, the whitening ideology, whiteness, and the epistemicide of black knowledge. The authors then discuss racism and the promotion of white supremacy in library teaching and professional action in libraries. Black US American and Black Brazilian Librarianship movements show that the activism and political action of black librarians advance the development of informational counter-narratives. Finally, the authors recommend three strategies for social, racial, and informational justice in the LIS field: including ethnic-racial studies in basic university courses curricula; building diverse, inclusive collections that account for ethnic-racial themes and authors; and considering “Pretuguese” keywords while indexing, in order to counter exclusion and promote epistemic repair. The authors conclude by advocating for these strategies to steer LIS professional and educational spheres toward contributing to forward an anti-racist society.

In the spring of 2021, the author embarked on a soulful exercise of teaching without bounds. The author’s vision was to create a communal classroom environment exploring Black feminist and critical race dimensions of the information stratophere. The course deceptively titled Information Justice & Community Engagement, surveyed contemporary texts that confront and critique the mechanizations of information studies that sustain White hegemonic norms. Each session was an exercise in reflection and creative expression. The author encourged students to name instruments of oppression, crtique information systems, and devise ways to dismantle racism though informed praxis. To accomplish this, the author prioritized intimacy, trust, and community building in the classroom space. The shared desire for the collective learning experience became love and liberation. Through this experience, the author learned that the teacher, as illuminated by bell hooks (1994) is more than instructor, but is truly engrossed in the work of freedom. This proposition, inspired by Paulo Friere’s (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed, offers clarity in the sacred, spiritual, and soulful exercise of learning with a reciprocal benefit to teacher and student. Using personal narrative and learning products this chapter will present the journey to developing an anti-racist consciouness in teaching and learning in a library and information studies (LIS/IS) course.

Justice rules are standards that serve as criteria for formulating fairness judgments. Though justice rules play a role in the organizational justice literature, they have seldom been the subject of analysis in their own right. To address this limitation, we first consider three meta-theoretical dualities that are highlighted by justice rules – the distinction between justice versus fairness, indirect versus direct measurement, and normative versus descriptive paradigms. Second, we review existing justice rules and organize them into four types of justice: distributive (e.g., equity, equality), procedural (e.g., voice, consistent treatment), interpersonal (e.g., politeness, respectfulness), and informational (e.g., candor, timeliness). We also emphasize emergent rules that have not received sufficient research attention. Third, we consider various computation models purporting to explain how justice rules are assessed and aggregated to form fairness judgments. Fourth and last, we conclude by reviewing research that enriches our understanding of justice rules by showing how they are cognitively processed. We observe that there are a number of influences on fairness judgments, and situations exist in which individuals do not systematically consider justice rules.

This chapter addresses the confluence of emotions, justice, and organizational change. Drawing on these three literatures, the chapter provides empirical analysis of over 100 separate organizational change events. The findings confirm previous research regarding patterns among emotions and demonstrate these patterns apply in the specific context of change. The findings also suggest that the degree of clarity one has when considering a change event matches the degree of intensity with which one experiences emotion. Finally, the findings suggest that even nominal change events are associated with intense experience of emotions. The chapter links these findings to several suggestions for further research.

The use of teams has increased significantly over the past two decades, with recent estimates suggesting that between 50% and 90% of employees work in some kind of team. This chapter examines the implications of this trend for the literature on organizational justice – the study of fairness perceptions and effects in the workplace. In particular, we explore three specific research questions: (1) Will the justice effects observed in individual contexts generalize to team contexts and member-directed reactions? (2) Will the justice experienced by specific teammates have direct or interactive effects on members’ own reactions? (3) Will the justice experienced by the team as a whole impact reactions at the team level of analysis? Our review of almost 30 studies suggests that each question can be answered in the affirmative, illustrating that team contexts can magnify the importance of justice in organizations.